FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-13-2011, 05:52 PM
"Richard W.M. Jones"
 
Default Guide to setting karma thresholds?

On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:43:42AM -0500, Michael Ekstrand wrote:
> I'm working on pushing my first bugfix to F15 (#711261), using the
> guides I found in the wiki[1][2]. For a non-critical-path package, the
> Update Policy says that it needs to meet the positive karma threshold
> set by the submitter, but does not indicate what that threshold should
> be or guidance for determining appropriate values. The default is 3;
> I'm assuming that leaving it there is a reasonable thing to do (and I
> won't be surprised if the 7-day criteria will be hit first for this
> package).
>
> However, I am still wondering: is there any guidance or policy published
> on how to determine appropriate karma thresholds? What justifies
> increasing or decreasing the thresholds? Userbase? Impact of change?

I always leave them as the defaults.

Rich.

--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines. Boot with a
live CD or over the network (PXE) and turn machines into Xen guests.
http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-p2v
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 06-14-2011, 12:02 AM
Kevin Kofler
 
Default Guide to setting karma thresholds?

Luke Macken wrote:
> Yeah, we have yet to step back and really think about the defaults for
> the karma thresholds, after having the +3/-3 defaults for so long. Some
> maintainers set the values very low to decrease the amount of time their
> update spends in testing, and some set the values really high (or
> disable them) to ensure that their update doesn't change state without
> mantainer intervention. It's designed to fit both maintainer styles.

I think we should stop enabling autokarma by default, and instead let
maintainers push stuff manually as soon as the karma is at +1, no matter
what the autokarma is set to (or whether it's even enabled). (This doesn't
give any more power to the maintainers than the current system, because the
threshold is settable by the maintainer! All it'd do is remove the incentive
to set a too low autokarma.)

(Now I actually think we should kill this whole "karma" concept entirely and
let the maintainers decide, but that isn't going to be acceptable to FESCo,
unfortunately. The proposal in the previous paragraph, on the other hand,
should be consistent with FESCo's requirements.)

Kevin Kofler

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:14 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org